Conceptualising External and Internal Quality Assurance in Higher Education: A Pragmatist Perspective

Abstract

The traditional tension between external and internal quality assurance implementation in higher education appears to be declining, based on a rethinking of the relationship between the two concepts. Although there are quality assurance agencies that still consider external and internal quality assurance as separate entities, most quality assurance agencies now regard the two concepts as complementary. In this paper, a case is put that the present rethinking of external and internal quality assurance in most higher education settings is guided by pragmatism, but not explicitly acknowledged in the literature. For a better appreciation of pragmatists' influence on the current understanding of the relationship between external and internal quality assurance in higher education, this paper provides a further pragmatist conceptualisation of the two concepts to enhance stakeholders' appreciation of employing a pragmatist approach to quality assurance practices in higher education. The conceptualisation is done through a pragmatist analysis of selected international accounts on higher education quality assurance. The paper concludes that pragmatism helps to understand external and internal quality assurance as nested concepts with reciprocities of accountability and improvement roles, and influences which call for alignment of perspectives through negotiations and settlements in order to focus on their practical relevance for implementation in higher education.La tension traditionnelle entre l'implémentation de systèmes d'assurance qualité interne et externe dans l'enseignement supérieur semble s'affaiblir grâce à la reconsidération de la relation entre ces deux concepts. Bien qu'il existe des agences d'assurance qualité qui continuent à considérer les assurances qualité interne et externe comme deux entités distinctes, la plupart des agences considèrent désormais qu'elles 136 assumption was that academic standards were safe in the hands of the universities, and because of indignation that the integrity of the academic profession should be impugned by the demand for public accountability.

Developing an Operational Approach to Educational Quality Assurance in Colleges under the Office of the Vocational Education Commission in Thailand

“…The operational approach to quality assurance includes internal and external quality assurance [14]. Internal quality assurance includes the mechanisms for enacting the meaning of quality, and external quality assurance includes the mechanisms for guaranteeing the meaning of quality [15].…”

Balancing the Focus of Quality Assurance Frameworks of Higher Education Institutions in Africa: A Ghanaian Context

“…Examples of such associations in Ghana are Ghana Medical and Dental Council, Nurses and Midwifery Council of Ghana, General Legal Council, and the Ghana Pharmacy Council [24][25][26][27]. Their involvement includes accreditation of professional study programmes, participation in accreditation panels set up by NAB and participation in curriculum review exercises [28]. Though these roles played by external quality assurance regulators have enhanced the image, deepened public trust and increased the attractiveness of Ghanaian higher education institutions, external quality assurance is still going through reforms and can best be described as "work-in-progress".…”

“…External stakeholders on the other hand include graduates, employers of graduates, professional representatives, regulatory authorities representatives, and funders [30]. Given that quality has multiple perspectives which demand alignment of different perspectives [28], quality assurance activities within higher education institutions ought to cover and involve all these key stakeholders. It also requires qualified, highly motivated, and empowered students who provide feedback on their learning experiences to inform improvement activities [32].…”

“…When such situations happen, there is the need to stabilise the quality assurance framework by increasing attention to the component that is receiving the least attention. We argue in this conceptualisation that this balance is a necessary condition for any resilient quality assurance framework in higher education because our operational definition of quality assurance is "mechanisms put in place by institutions to guarantee and enact stakeholders' expectations of quality" [28]. It stands to reason that at any particular point, there is likely to be disproportionate attention given to the three (people, programme, and place) areas of the quality assurance framework depending on the quality concerns of a particular higher education institution.…”

“…A pragmatist conceptualisation of quality assurance frameworks needs to mirror the prevailing quality concerns it seeks to address. This calls for continual balancing of the foci of quality assurance frameworks to reflect the changing concerns of quality in higher education [6].…”